Yeah, I agree that it seems unlikely that Bayless is being 'heavily' shopped. I could see a deal come along that Pritchard can't refuse, but I doubt we're beating the bushes desperately looking to move him. Frankly, I think Brandon Roy and or Rudy Fernandez should be the backup point guard with Bayless getting minutes where he's comfortable, as the scorer at SG. I saw an interview, I believe with one of the Blazers scouts (Jason Fillipi?) where he was asked: what does Portland need from a backup point guard? ...his answer was something along the lines of 'Bring the ball up court, give it to brandon Roy and get out of the way, and then defend the point guard on the other end." That still sounds like Bayless to me. He's never going to be Chris Paul, but what more do we need? He provides solid defense. He has the handles to bring the ball upcourt. He can play well off the ball with guys creating shots for him as he takes it to the rim. If we put him in situations where he's comfortable, he'll be a good player.
I don't see Bayless getting moved either unless it is for someone young like Conley. Which if I was Memphis I would explore as Mayo has made it clear he wants to play the point. I think Bayless would compliment him well. If we would have gotten a younger point guard in a trade like Hinrich then yes Bayless would be trade bait. But With Miller 2 years and done, the time frame works out well.
agreed. We won't move Bayless unless we have a plan to get a young PG prospect like Flynn, Conley or Sessions. One of those ships has probably sailed. I doubt Tyreke Evans or Brandon Jennings are currently tradeable but they also might be worth taking a look at. Some like Augustine. I think Bayless could be a good energy scorer off the bench if allowed to become that. He could possibly be what we hoped we had in Jarret Jack. For that to happen though he would have to take Rudy's minutes at backup 2 or possibly alongside Rudy in the second unit with Rudy running the plays. Something has got to give in the PG department and I remain unconvinced that Bayless is the answer. I used to have alot of confidence in him making the transition, but along with SL I've seen some convincing arguments about PG's being born and not made. There might just be some truth to that old chestnut after all.
I don't think the opportunity to trade Jerryd for another young up and coming PG will be there but I think the opportunity to take advantage of a team losing money could be had. Perhaps with the right combination, you could get Gerald Wallace with a combination of Bayless and Outlaw could be done. If I could, I would trade Bayless and filler for a resigned Ramon Sessions. I think the Bucks would do it too as long as they shed salary and add young talent at a cheap price. I don't know how interested Pritchard would be in that though. I think if you can add a really good starting 3, it might be beneficial to let Bayless go.
In my opinion the only player that we risk a Jermaine O'Neal situation with is Batum, and since he already got good pt for being a raw, rookie last year pretty much makes sure that wont happen. So if we need to trade Bayless to lessen our depth I'd be all for it.
If we could add a young or prime SF like Wallace to play ahead of Batum for 3 years or so it might make sense to trade Bayless. You need to continue look for an answer at PG though. I think it's pretty important that we find a young prospect who can run this team. I guess worst case scenario stop gap veterans ala Phil Jackson. However, it works better with the triangle. Is Tex Winter some kind of genius or what? I mean considering this is a copy cat league one assumes that the triangle offense must be virtually impossible to duplicate. Stunning there aren't more people using it really. I wonder how his stroke will impact LA next year if at all.
I hope the acquisition of Andre Miller hasn't made Pritchard forget about the future of the PG position. If we could trade Outlaw and Bayless for a re-signed Sessions and filler I'd love to do it. Other than that, I don't see young point guards being traded because they are most likely already on a rookie contract and are playing for cheap. I imagine there are owners who are hurting right now so I think acquiring a vet SF would be easier than anything. Gerald Wallace was almost had last year, Richard Jefferson and Vince Carter as well. I'm sure there are other similar opportunities out there right now that we haven't heard of. Wallace would be terrific, heck... Richard Jefferson would fit this team like a glove with the acquisition of Andre Miller.
You could even add Blake into the equation possibly. Blake + Outlaw + Bayless + $$$ for Sessions. It's possible you get another decent prime guard to go along with Ridnour and run the point until Jennings is ready to take over. You get a 3/4 who might even be starter material on the bucks. You also get a young 2 guard to put next to Jennings (they played together here and there in Arizona) for a future back court. It's possible that would be a master stroke if he did it but would solidify our lineup. I think you have to ask for Kurt Thomas as well. I'm not holding my breath, we'll see what happens. Jefferson and Carter are gone they sailed when RLEC wasn't used, but who knows the actual details of those supposed trades. I heard they were trying to get Sessions as well. I think Sessions might be a bit more tradeable now with the addition of Jennings.
Great trade for Milwaukee. As a Blazer fan, I hate it. I value Bayless alone more than Sessions. We don't need Sessions now and I'd rather have Bayless in the future. Also, Jennings is from So Cal and never once suited up for Arizona and if he had, he would've missed Bayless by a year - they didn't really play together.
I said here and there "IN" Arizona. Not AT Arizona. Jennings was thought to be Bayless' back court mate at Arizona but then went to Europe instead of going to College. [video=youtube;UtUFVcKreZY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtUFVcKreZY&feature=PlayList&p=F7F13CA85BC13F80&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=18"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtUFVcKreZY&feature=PlayList&p=F7F13CA85BC13F80&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=18[/video]
You think Bayless will be Roy's long term back court mate? I mean you're dead certain of that? I'm totally confident saying right now Sessions is better then Bayless.
Yes he is. I think Bayless eventually will be a fine 6th-man type. I also think that our trading assets may be better spent on a nice backup PF.
I think Bayless could very well be Roy's long term backcourt mate. How could anyone be certain though? Sessions is now better than Bayless, I agree. But we have Blake and Miller already; I also have faith that Bayless will turn out to be a better player than Sessions and at a much cheaper pay rate until that time comes for him to be extended.
